ade towell

I see a lot of mixed feelings on this thread, and that may be because this community is very demanding, in a good way

I would think that's because many of us owned THE NX1, which was so much ahead of it's time. Now that being said, I just got my XT4 a couple of days ago with a 16-55 2.8., and it's my first XT4 camera so keep that in mind while reading my first review so far. Also I'm a 70% video oriented 30% stills.
Also I have zero brand loyalty. I don't care about brands at all. If tomorrow Sony has the camera and lenses that suits my needs better I'll sell everything and jump ships. Just to give you a bit of context

I should also add that I own a Z6 and I find that it's an amazing camera with amazing (too few) lenses.
So far this is how I feel about the XT4 :

Ergonomics : It's a beautiful camera ! However I don't like the ergonomics to be honest. I think the camera feels bulky, it's like handling a brick. I'm still working to get the most practical set up and it feels like a lot can be customized in terms of buttons. So I'm pretty sure that I could get used to after a couple of weeks toying around. Now that being said, it doesn't compare in any way with the pleasure of holding the Z6. There are so many buttons in the back, and to me it feels like those big buttons on top of the Fuji that give the "vintage look" could also turn out to be useless and maybe in the way of better ergonomics. I don't know how much this participates in the Fuji identity, but to me it's more of a waste. Again, I'm not a "Fuji" shooter, just a filmmaker with a Fuji camera in his hands
I love how they have 2 different modes for stills / movies. I would think that this is now a norm in 2020 but kudos to Fuji to bring that to their camera, feels like they really listen to their user base.

Autofocus : I need more to get around all the AF settings but so far in terms of Face/eye tracking to me the AF lacks a lot behind Sony, AND Nikon (Nikon made a great job at improving the AF in the past months. I used it a lot during interviews and it was flawless in eye Af). 
Now that being said, the AF in stills, is incredibly snap and fast. But I don't think I could trust it for a documentary yet where I would have to run around a subject. I would trust Nikon AF, it's not as good as Sony or Canon, but I feel confident enough. Probably because it never "hunts" even when it loses its subject, it doesn't. So far I felt that the XT4 could hunt in eye tracking and actually even lose focus when the box for the eye was correctly placed ! So I need to dig more into this, but it feels strange. Again the box would lock the eye, but still focus on something else... 
I give the camera the benefit of the doubt because I haven't played around enough with all the settings yet, and also I feel like Fuji could bring an update on the AF firmware wise.

Video modes : what is there to say ? Internal 4k 10bit with F-log AND assist (Rec 709 lut) with no crop, 60p with a very small crop, 240fps in Full HD. However I haven't been able to find the 120fps mode, so I don't know if you have to make a special setting or what not...

Dynamic Range : That was one of my primary concern, and I feel like it's actually great. However the different picture profiles for video are IMHO way too contrasty and make everything looks like it was shot on a cheap smartphone (highlights are completely burnt etc). I'm going to film everything in Flog probably, and just apply a standard lut after wise.

Skin tones : Now that is something so important for filmmaker. I love how the Z6 has this very smooth skin tones. A bit too magenta, I keep dialing in some more green tones (especially when using Filmconvert). But skin tones feel very silky-smooth with the Z6 while still retaining some details. I'm not sure how much I love the skin tones from the XT4 in F-log, I would need a bit more time, but just the fact that its 10bit gives you more leeway for grading. For now I'd say that it lacks a bit of saturation. I have this feeling that many videos I have seen with the XT3/XT4 have very pale skin tones and lack a bit of contrast and texture. Now again that is more of an intuition so far. I have a strong feeling that if correctly graded this camera can deliver.
I can't wait to experiment with my clients to see how this goes (hopefully well !).

Stills : I haven't play much with still but the AF seemed very responsive, very fast, trustworthy. And you can tweak the Burt modes a lot.  

Battery life : seems really good ! I heard the XT3 had a weakness in this area, I can say that I wouldn't be afraid of using just one battery for a short interview job. But of course you always need at least two. They should have included a charger for the battery. That feels cheap. My Z6 had one.

IBIS : It's REALLY, REALLY GOOD. 90% of the time. And then sometimes it does something a bit weird. I would say, don't take IBIS for granted, rather lear how it works and use it to your advantage. It was never designed to replace a gimbal. However I could definitely see myself going around filming in the city without a tripod  And that is really COOL !

Flip screen : don't like it. I'd rather have the classic tilt camera. I couldn't see why Vloggers would need such a powerhouse camera to film themselves, not judging it's really just a thought. Fuji : you guys should dedicate the camera to "power users". Don't try to go in all the different directions. I'm only speaking for myself but I'm not a big fan of filming while looking outside of the axis of my camera. I don't want to look on the side it bring my balance off. I don't know if the floppy screen is something people have been asking ? But to me it's a downside. I don't know how you guys feel about it.
Overall : So far it's a great first impression. It's really funny to see a vintage looking camera actually performing like a monster. 10 bit 4K 60p F-log + assist almost no crop... That is insane.
I'm not a big fan of the handling of this brick, but I can't see why I couldn't find a sleeve, handle to make it more to my taste. I also read that this is already improved since XT3, so keep up the improvements Fuji
Also I love how this camera eats my 128GB Sandisk 95Mb/s with 4K @ 400mbps. That is really cool.

If Nikon comes up with a Z6 Mark 2 10bit 4K internal, will I keep my Fuji ? I honestly don't know, probably not. But the camera market is not about "what if", but "what is". So for now I'm very, very happy that I can be a hybrid shooter with IBIS, and 4K 10bit 1,5x crop factor. 

That's it for me  sorry for making this way too long ^^ 
 

A simple talking head setup - check!
Only 1 bulb (out of 4) used and - okay, I admit it - it was a bit too bright to my liking in this scenario.
Don't ignore inverse square law, lads and guys!
The key light was ~ 50 cm away from me.
f/1.4 , 1/160 s, ISO 1000, WB - 4000K

 
BTS:

 

Colour is subjective (I actually prefer Panasonic colour science since EVA, S1 etc), the rest of these you're just guessing, IBIS and DR of the S1, SH1 are going to be hard to beat.
Hope you're right as progress benefits all of us but your Canon love in and trashing of the BM Pocket is a little OTT

This would be a great move and I think create a whole new buzz about the C200, at £5800 new it is still too high for a camera without a middle codec and I would prefer the Panasonic EVA - but 10 bit would make a return to Canon more interesting for me. I have no interest in 8k of the R5 but would spend that kind of money on a used proper cine/video camera

All sounds about right, a shame as not interested in an 8 bit camera and I'm not willing to pay the premium for a stills camera with a RAW feature I don't really want when I can get a proper video camera used for about the same price. 
Is a bit like the C200 conundrum for me, 8 bit is not enough, RAW too much for my needs, just give me a decent 10 bit.
Will stick with the Fuji XT3 

All sounds about right, a shame as not interested in an 8 bit camera and I'm not willing to pay the premium for a stills camera with a RAW feature I don't really want when I can get a proper video camera used for about the same price. 
Is a bit like the C200 conundrum for me, 8 bit is not enough, RAW too much for my needs, just give me a decent 10 bit.
Will stick with the Fuji XT3 

Currently no Canon camera either DSLR or C line offers RAW in resolutions below the sensor wide. So a 8k sensor will be 8k RAW only, 5.5K will 5.5K RAW and so on....  So I don't expect any DSLR with 4K RAW from Canon at the moment.... 
The above is pure speculation.... I would not rule out 4k 10bit... probably no RAW if they go SD card only....

With the cost cutting on the displays and build quality, it can be seen as a much cheaper 6D-class camera with IBIS, 4k60p and 1080p120p
8-bit 4:2:0 IPB compression (8-bit 4:2:2 external) and no Canon Log (crop, no AF in some modes) would be the most logical to expect from Canon., capable as a consumer camera, but not a pro-level camera either for stills or video. 
Which would mean that for better dynamic range, 10-bit or RAW codecs (to CFExpress cards) one needs to step up. But we'll see.

And yes lower-res 4k RAW would be useful, except that's exactly what their Cinema cameras provide, so I can't see them putting anything similar in a stills camera.

Or next year, the 1DX III 5.5k60p RAW recording capability with IBIS will be put in a mirrorless camera (for about the same price).

Unfortunately the only mode I found RS acceptable on the eos-r was full frame HD but the image was closer to the soft Canon mush of their old dslrs than it was to the lovely detailed C100. Used C100s are still a great camera if you don't need 4k

Hmm yes oh well, disappointing and why are the audio controls on the bottom right side of the camera? That's a nightmare for solo shooters

I've tried 7Artisans 25/1.8 (with the correct focal length set in the menu), Fuji XF 35/1.4 and Fuji 23/2. They all yield the same results, both with SAF, CAF and Manual focus. IBIS was turned on, IS BOOST mode and DIS was turned off, turning them on makes the problem even worse. I've included a shot with IBIS+DIS in my test video that @androidladposted. I even tested H264 vs H265, DCI VS 16:9, 100 vs 200 vs 400 mbps, 25 vs 50 fps. Same result. 
The thing is, you have to move the camera slowly in order for this to happen. It seems to me that the camera realizes to late that it's actually moving and compensates for it with the "jump" If I increase the speed of the exact same movement, the sensor doesn't jump.

I think I'd make a lot more use of RAW if it did it in 4k though. Haven't been keeping up, will the R6 be more tailored to 4k?

What about price?
It's interesting the P4k seems to be the camera mentioned a few times here being replaced by the R5 - depending on the price you can get 3 maybe 4 of the P4k to one R5. They're not in the same price bracket not even close. Same with P6K. 
I'm not sure when R5 Is due out but I'd imagine it's going to be a long time before film and video production gets back to any kind of normal. Are people really going to be in a position to invest in a camera so much more expensive than what they're currently using? Or is it going to be a time for consolidation and just trying to get by on what you have?  

What about price?
It's interesting the P4k seems to be the camera mentioned a few times here being replaced by the R5 - depending on the price you can get 3 maybe 4 of the P4k to one R5. They're not in the same price bracket not even close. Same with P6K. 
I'm not sure when R5 Is due out but I'd imagine it's going to be a long time before film and video production gets back to any kind of normal. Are people really going to be in a position to invest in a camera so much more expensive than what they're currently using? Or is it going to be a time for consolidation and just trying to get by on what you have?  

Blimey I come back a few days later and you are still arguing with yourself pretty much - not being funny but you seem to have gone down a rabbit hole and killed whatever interest I had in this thread. Anyway sorry to interrupt, as you were...

Blimey I come back a few days later and you are still arguing with yourself pretty much - not being funny but you seem to have gone down a rabbit hole and killed whatever interest I had in this thread. Anyway sorry to interrupt, as you were...

But which Canon camera? I've worked with 8 bit Canon footage from various versions of the 5D, 6D and 7D over the last decade and the footage was a terrible experience to grade compared to my experience with BRAW from the Pocket.  Sure, when you pay money for their higher end cameras, you get the sort of files that make colour grading easier.  But does my Pocket 4K or 6K sit in the same level as a Canon C500 or 1DX III.  Of course not.  It's not in ARRI territory either.  Its foolish even to compare them in my opinion.
I do look at image quality and colour,  just as any other buyer of camera.  I chose the Pocket 4K.  I will doubtless choose the 6K too.  I won't be choosing the R5.  I am certainly intrigued by its developments and welcome Canon taking their lower end cameras more seriously, but it's not for me.
As you say, no one cares what you shoot your footage with.  They care about what you created.  I pick the camera that is in my budget, has features I need and like and an image quality and colour I can work with.  For those reasons, I chose the Pocket.  Others on this forum chose the URSA.  In my opinion they made great choices.  Whether Canon colour is easier to grade with certain models and with the R5 is frankly besides the point.  If I like Blackmagic colours, then I'm not fighting their colour science, I'm embracing it.  That will always make grading easier.  Why would I want an image I am working with to look like Canon, when I am not always a fan of the Canon image.  Aside from great skin tones, which I do like, their colours often don't do much for me.  And your examples have only proved that point to me.  
I'm sure we can all dig around on the internet to find videos to support our points of view.  But frankly it's an argument that still is as many have said, including you at one point, very much subjective.
 

Of course it's up for debate.  It's being debated here and it's being debated elsewhere.  How we each perceive colour is something that has often been debated.  How bright or accurate colour looks can depend on age, what you're use to seeing.  How do you know that the way I see red, is precisely the way you see red.  There have been images on the internet, where people have debated what colour something is, with different results from person to person.  The blue and black or white and gold dress being a famous example of how we don't always perceive colour in the same way, when shown the same image.  
Colour science and how we each perceive it is a complex issue and yet you think you have the answers.  You have an opinion, nothing more.
I agree Arri is very popular.  So is Canon.  But popularity doesn't mean a universal truth.  To me, Canon isn't accurate straight out.  Yes it gives pleasing skin tones; but often by giving them a warmth not always seen in real life.  My opinion of course.  In the Canon vs Nikon debate, I personally feel Nikon is more true to real life, whilst Canon is more pleasing to look at.  
I get you love Canon.  But its colour profile whilst considered true to life from your own personal perspective and therefore requiring less grading from yourself, is still just your opinion and not fact.

Colour is subjective (I actually prefer Panasonic colour science since EVA, S1 etc), the rest of these you're just guessing, IBIS and DR of the S1, SH1 are going to be hard to beat.
Hope you're right as progress benefits all of us but your Canon love in and trashing of the BM Pocket is a little OTT

Colour is subjective (I actually prefer Panasonic colour science since EVA, S1 etc), the rest of these you're just guessing, IBIS and DR of the S1, SH1 are going to be hard to beat.
Hope you're right as progress benefits all of us but your Canon love in and trashing of the BM Pocket is a little OTT

Colour is subjective (I actually prefer Panasonic colour science since EVA, S1 etc), the rest of these you're just guessing, IBIS and DR of the S1, SH1 are going to be hard to beat.
Hope you're right as progress benefits all of us but your Canon love in and trashing of the BM Pocket is a little OTT

Colour is subjective (I actually prefer Panasonic colour science since EVA, S1 etc), the rest of these you're just guessing, IBIS and DR of the S1, SH1 are going to be hard to beat.
Hope you're right as progress benefits all of us but your Canon love in and trashing of the BM Pocket is a little OTT

Colour is subjective (I actually prefer Panasonic colour science since EVA, S1 etc), the rest of these you're just guessing, IBIS and DR of the S1, SH1 are going to be hard to beat.
Hope you're right as progress benefits all of us but your Canon love in and trashing of the BM Pocket is a little OTT

This would be a great move and I think create a whole new buzz about the C200, at £5800 new it is still too high for a camera without a middle codec and I would prefer the Panasonic EVA - but 10 bit would make a return to Canon more interesting for me. I have no interest in 8k of the R5 but would spend that kind of money on a used proper cine/video camera

That would work for me. Be interesting to see what the Sony fx6 offers